Take out AF from the equation, DSLRs have NOTHING left over mirrorless.

Besides quality ergonomics, availability of many native and third party accessories, and ubiquity of native lens options, and...

dSLR's have a TON of things left over mirrorless cameras!

This is absolutely true of the current mirrorless v DSLR offerings, however it's not an inherent flaw of the mirrorless cameras. There's nothing stopping Panasonic or Sony from making a camera that handles well, though no mirrorless manufacturer has done so yet. Fuji and Olympus seem more concerned with making those horrible faux-retro styled cameras.

The real flaws of mirrorless are AF, viewfinder and battery life. AF may be solved one day, all makers are moving towards PDAF on sensor. There's no solution for poor viewfinders and battery life in mirrorless cameras.

Totally agree. Add to this, the bad ergonomics of the small cameras, with very few external controls. And to add to to gimmicky approach, there are also some mirrorless with touch screens, I wonder how difficult its going to be to use a touchscreen when perhaps you might have a longer lens or a flash attached to your camera and have to hold the whole thing at an arms length while trying to touch the screen. Not to mentions there is no question of using an EVF with that camera. This is not even in the same ball park compared to the easiness of changing the settings on a DSLR which we do without even taking out eye off the OVF where all the buttons are designed to be on our finger tips. Mirrorless is just not designed to be as versatile. There are always compromises most of which are driven by size. There is nothing wrong with mirrorless itself, ppl who want a small camera with good quality will buy it, but there is no point arguing that its better than FF.

Not to mention the other shortcomings like not having the same level of accessories as FF or the slow autofocus. Mirrorless currently is no match to the ease of use and the speed and control a DSLR gives you when you can compose using the viewfinder and having the AF-C tracking your subject while you can change any settings using the two command dials and have all your controls at your finger tips. Not to mention that IQ will always be better than the smaller sensors.

Not to mention the bloated ridiculous price on most of these small sensor cams. After charging 1000$+ for the m43 sensor camera, they dont have a built-in flash but have a OVF hump. How much more wannabe can it get! You get a better camera for 500$ and will also have access to a more mature and exhaustive family of lenses and accessories while getting better IQ, at the expense of a little weight and size which a lot of ppl serious about photography dont really bother about.

Not to mention the bloated ridiculous price on most of these small sensor cams. After charging 1000$+ for the m43 sensor camera, they dont have a built-in flash but have a OVF hump. How much more wannabe can it get! You get a better camera for 500$ and will also have access to a more mature and exhaustive family of lenses and accessories while getting better IQ, at the expense of a little weight and size which a lot of ppl serious about photography dont really bother about.

Wow, it's great to have a choice. Use what ever camera you want. I do and I don't feel limited by any of them.

2 of them are for work and 1 is for play but they all produce the same IQ.

Not to mention the bloated ridiculous price on most of these small sensor cams. After charging 1000$+ for the m43 sensor camera, they dont have a built-in flash but have a OVF hump. How much more wannabe can it get! You get a better camera for 500$ and will also have access to a more mature and exhaustive family of lenses and accessories while getting better IQ, at the expense of a little weight and size which a lot of ppl serious about photography dont really bother about.

I would love to disagree but I couldn't. The truth is DSLR rein supreme when you factor in Price/Performance ratio. Take the $1100 Nikon D7100 for example, it run circles over Panasonic GH3 or Olympus e-M5 in every performance category but the video. Nikon also a very mature flash system. Micro43's native flash leave much to be desire. Canon / Nikon has every lens under the sun covering every need

So I would have to reluctantly agree with you. But I would break it down in term of price: category:

[$400 ~ $699] this is the category where Mirrorless begin to win over DSLR. Buyers in this category seek Continuous AF in VIDEO to film their vacation. Video is as important as Still photography, and they usually dislike Big Bulky DSLR. Most Asian buyer are in this group; and Panasonic Olympus Sony sold a load of their mirrorless in Asia, over 58% are buying mirrorless over DSLR.

[$200 ~ $400] without cheap dSLR, cheap Mirrorless dominate this category. The only truth competitor are the advance compact/point/shoot like Canon S100/G15

Not to mention the bloated ridiculous price on most of these small sensor cams. After charging 1000$+ for the m43 sensor camera, they dont have a built-in flash but have a OVF hump. How much more wannabe can it get! You get a better camera for 500$ and will also have access to a more mature and exhaustive family of lenses and accessories while getting better IQ, at the expense of a little weight and size which a lot of ppl serious about photography dont really bother about.

It seems like Olympus with their wannabe camera equipped with tiny m4/3 sensor, hump and no built in-flash sells like hotcakes for way more than $1000... Seems like al those buyers are completely brainless because (according to you) can get the same and even more for less than the half of the money. Way to go Olympus!

People who are seriously about photography don't really bother about the equipment of others, and don't whine about choices of others on a forum.

I suspect, though, that the SLR/DSLR form factor will stick around for much longer than the actual mirror box. There's a reason the GH3 is designed to look like a mini-DSLR.

Yeah. You can't kill good ergonomics to those enthusiasts / pros that want it and need it. I definitely see the SLR/DSLR shape living well beyond the mirror box.

Couldn't agree more. The current MILC forms are a disaster ergonomically for extended periods of shooting.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

well, i was following a guy with an OMD, for 8 hours on a tour in Istanbul.. he looked pretty happy all day long.. snapping away.. changing lenses.... at the end of the day he was showing me his pics telling me how he loved the camera... i carried around a point and shoot for many years.. tiny buttons... the old canon s30 BRICK.. i never thought to myself once "gee this camera is a pain to hold and use when i'm out all day shooting...

I think, if someone is not going to like the ergonomics of a small ILC, then they're not going to be happy within 10 shots.. not an 'extended period of time'

wanna disaster of ergonomics... ? like the guy next to me in a restaurant who was lugging a d300 and an 18-200 lens... "I cant stand this camera after a day of shooting" he told me..

Take out AF from the equation, DSLRs have NOTHING left over mirrorless.

Besides quality ergonomics, availability of many native and third party accessories, and ubiquity of native lens options, and...

dSLR's have a TON of things left over mirrorless cameras!

This is absolutely true of the current mirrorless v DSLR offerings, however it's not an inherent flaw of the mirrorless cameras. There's nothing stopping Panasonic or Sony from making a camera that handles well, though no mirrorless manufacturer has done so yet. Fuji and Olympus seem more concerned with making those horrible faux-retro styled cameras.

Absolutely agreed. They aren't 'forever' faults, just 'for now' faults. Someday they may very well be rectified. However, until they are solved MILC's are at an inherent disadvantage in those areas and those problems contribute towards their position as a less versatile solution overall.

Your job as a salesman is to identify if a consumer is an Apple Fanboy or an Android Geek, and proceed to sale him/her on their own brand biases.

Agreed on that, but of course there are some customers who also come into the shop with no brand biases and want to be told what to buy from the sales staff. Plenty of those types of customers around, particularly on items that don't get much mainstream advertising.

If I were to walk into a store selling tiles or ... tennis racquets...or...some other item I know nothing about and have no interest in (except that I need one, either for me or as a gift for someone), I'd be very influenced by the talk of shopkeepers. How many of us have the time and patience to research everything? Probably not many of us.

How would we be reacting in a store if we had to purchase something (a good or service) that we knew nothing about? We'd probably try to find the 'safe route' talking about 'trusted brands' and buying one of them. Maybe even looking at what the 'big names' are using. Or the items we saw on some cooking show (if we have to buy cooking gear). If they use it, it must be OK, right?

Just like the camera purchaser buying Nikon or Canon

A 'safe choice' is sought with minimal time and patience to seek alternatives.

Not to mention the bloated ridiculous price on most of these small sensor cams. After charging 1000$+ for the m43 sensor camera, they dont have a built-in flash but have a OVF hump. How much more wannabe can it get! You get a better camera for 500$ and will also have access to a more mature and exhaustive family of lenses and accessories while getting better IQ, at the expense of a little weight and size which a lot of ppl serious about photography dont really bother about.

It seems like Olympus with their wannabe camera equipped with tiny m4/3 sensor, hump and no built in-flash sells like hotcakes for way more than $1000... Seems like al those buyers are completely brainless because (according to you) can get the same and even more for less than the half of the money. Way to go Olympus!

Yes ppl can get better IQ for less money, but its not my concern what they settle for.

People who are seriously about photography don't really bother about the equipment of others, and don't whine about choices of others on a forum.

Midwest wrote:Faster autofocus will help mirrorless sales, I don't doubt it, but I don't believe that most of the DSLR user base is looking for some way rid themselves of that mirror. For most of us it doesn't seem to be a problem. Those who like and want a mirrorless camera are welcome to one of course.

Take out AF from the equation, DSLRs have NOTHING left over mirrorless.

I can't use a jerky, smeary or laggy EVF when shooting action, and that is entirely a different issue than autofocus. In the past when I've been in discussions of that, the EVF proponents showed photos where something was happening IN the shot - someone batting a ball or a dog running toward the camera - as an example that an EVF can shoot 'action'. I shoot action where the subject is often moving across my field of view and I have to pan and zoom at the same time to try and keep the subject in the frame and reasonably well composed. Mirrorless can't do that except by sheer luck.

I don't want a smaller camera, I don't have any problems with the mirror, I like my viewfinder just the way it is. Those who want mirrorless are more than welcome to them.

wanna disaster of ergonomics... ? like the guy next to me in a restaurant who was lugging a d300 and an 18-200 lens... "I cant stand this camera after a day of shooting" he told me..

But I bet he loves the results

I wonder how he'd feel with an out-of-balance mirorless model with less directly accessible controls and far less grip and large-ish lens compared to the body (but a total weight reduction over his current gear).

There are zillions of people shooting photos with their iPhones, and some of those people will get excited about photography, and they will want to step up to a "real" camera, and the common perception in the United States is that a real camera is a DSLR.

The majority of people buying DSLRs will be too intellectually lazy to really figure out how to use them, and they will get tired of them and go back to using their iPhone. But don't worry, if they can afford an iPhone, they can afford an entry-level DSLR and won't go bankrupt because they bought one.

But will they choose a mirrorless model instead? I think so; it's much more familiar to them and smaller. So the person that wants a better camera will gravitate toward such models first, I think. But time will tell.

I was struck by a recent camera store visit. All the 'old man' DSLRs behind glass, on the shelves (with big lenses and big bodies). All the 'small and cute' playthings on display, for customers to touch and hold and play with. Many mirrorless models on display to touch and hold too.

Since my last camera store visit some years ago, the landscape has completely changed. We probably aren't seeing the mirrorless onslaught in full effect yet, because I think the cam industry is not selling as much as they'd like thanks to phones. But I think mirrorless will continue growing at the expense of DSLRs (I love to use both).

I just can't see the masses going for the 'old man' DSLRs with big bodies. Some will continue to, but most that want to go beyond compacts will go mirrorless and be far more familiar with how it works too (no mirror to try to get used to and a smaller size than an 'old man' DSLR), assuming they want a quality jump beyond compacts.

Not to mention the bloated ridiculous price on most of these small sensor cams. After charging 1000$+ for the m43 sensor camera, they dont have a built-in flash but have a OVF hump. How much more wannabe can it get! You get a better camera for 500$ and will also have access to a more mature and exhaustive family of lenses and accessories while getting better IQ, at the expense of a little weight and size which a lot of ppl serious about photography dont really bother about.

It seems like Olympus with their wannabe camera equipped with tiny m4/3 sensor, hump and no built in-flash sells like hotcakes for way more than $1000... Seems like al those buyers are completely brainless because (according to you) can get the same and even more for less than the half of the money. Way to go Olympus!

Yes ppl can get better IQ for less money, but its not my concern what they settle for.

People who are seriously about photography don't really bother about the equipment of others, and don't whine about choices of others on a forum.

Than why nagging about it?

I use camera equipment for fun as a hobby and the best IQ for the money (don't buy Canon APS-C than) doesn't have to make a nice and fine photographic tool. There are far more things to taking into account. For me m4/3 is the best system. For someone else it is an other system. I don't care, just having fun with what I have.

Since my last camera store visit some years ago, the landscape has completely changed. We probably aren't seeing the mirrorless onslaught in full effect yet, because I think the cam industry is not selling as much as they'd like thanks to phones. But I think mirrorless will continue growing at the expense of DSLRs (I love to use both).

Considering that DSLR sales are growing faster than mirrorless, you cannot state that anything is coming at the expense of DSLR's.

I just can't see the masses going for the 'old man' DSLRs with big bodies.

DSLR's outsell mirrorless, but huge margins. I just got back from the Chinese Grand Prix in Shanghai. DSLR's were everywhere to be seen. I bet you could find 100 Canon, Nikon and Sony SLR's for every mirrorless camera. Same in the camera shops here. 10 SLR stores for every mirrorless one.

Some will continue to, but most that want to go beyond compacts will go mirrorless and be far more familiar with how it works too

Wrong. Completely wrong.

(no mirror to try to get used to and a smaller size than an 'old man' DSLR), assuming they want a quality jump beyond compacts.

Not to mention the bloated ridiculous price on most of these small sensor cams. After charging 1000$+ for the m43 sensor camera, they dont have a built-in flash but have a OVF hump. How much more wannabe can it get! You get a better camera for 500$ and will also have access to a more mature and exhaustive family of lenses and accessories while getting better IQ, at the expense of a little weight and size which a lot of ppl serious about photography dont really bother about.

It seems like Olympus with their wannabe camera equipped with tiny m4/3 sensor, hump and no built in-flash sells like hotcakes for way more than $1000... Seems like al those buyers are completely brainless because (according to you) can get the same and even more for less than the half of the money. Way to go Olympus!

Yes it is selling like hotcakes, take for example OMD sold so much that even joke of the year pentax Q outsold it in year 2012 in japan.

People who are seriously about photography don't really bother about the equipment of others, and don't whine about choices of others on a forum.

The appropriate forum to post this comment would be m43 forum because that the only forum where you see a thread almost everyday comparing m43 to dslrs.

Why should anyone on this forum care? If I were a sales or marketing department head for Olympus or Sony, perhaps. But this is not a forum for marketing, it is a forum for photographers. How do month to month sales figures affect my photos?

If brand "X" is selling fewer lenses this month in aggregated Asian sales, will my brand "X" camera cease to function? Will it turn into a pumpkin? Will my brand "Y" camera which has better sales in Europe suddenly increase in performance, or get lighter, or change color?

How important is it to have a camera that everyone else has? Should I be cheering for my brand(s) like I do for sports teams?

Since my last camera store visit some years ago, the landscape has completely changed. We probably aren't seeing the mirrorless onslaught in full effect yet, because I think the cam industry is not selling as much as they'd like thanks to phones. But I think mirrorless will continue growing at the expense of DSLRs (I love to use both).

Considering that DSLR sales are growing faster than mirrorless, you cannot state that anything is coming at the expense of DSLR's.

I doubt they are growing faster than mirrorless.

I just can't see the masses going for the 'old man' DSLRs with big bodies.

DSLR's outsell mirrorless, but huge margins.

Yes they do; there is no argument there. Growth versus total sales are two different things though. I am saying mirrorless will grow faster than DSLR, if it isn't already.

I just got back from the Chinese Grand Prix in Shanghai. DSLR's were everywhere to be seen. I bet you could find 100 Canon, Nikon and Sony SLR's for every mirrorless camera. Same in the camera shops here. 10 SLR stores for every mirrorless one.

Some will continue to, but most that want to go beyond compacts will go mirrorless and be far more familiar with how it works too

Wrong. Completely wrong.

I'm talking about the future, not the present day sales. I thought that was obvious.

cannot agree more with what you said. I have both and I use both systems. Birding belongs to DSLR, but hiking with a M43 is sweet.

FoolyCooly wrote:

vzlnc wrote:

Not to mention the bloated ridiculous price on most of these small sensor cams. After charging 1000$+ for the m43 sensor camera, they dont have a built-in flash but have a OVF hump. How much more wannabe can it get! You get a better camera for 500$ and will also have access to a more mature and exhaustive family of lenses and accessories while getting better IQ, at the expense of a little weight and size which a lot of ppl serious about photography dont really bother about.

Wow, it's great to have a choice. Use what ever camera you want. I do and I don't feel limited by any of them.

2 of them are for work and 1 is for play but they all produce the same IQ.

Not to mention the bloated ridiculous price on most of these small sensor cams. After charging 1000$+ for the m43 sensor camera, they dont have a built-in flash but have a OVF hump. How much more wannabe can it get! You get a better camera for 500$ and will also have access to a more mature and exhaustive family of lenses and accessories while getting better IQ, at the expense of a little weight and size which a lot of ppl serious about photography dont really bother about.

I would love to disagree but I couldn't. The truth is DSLR rein supreme when you factor in Price/Performance ratio. Take the $1100 Nikon D7100 for example, it run circles over Panasonic GH3 or Olympus e-M5 in every performance category but the video. Nikon also a very mature flash system. Micro43's native flash leave much to be desire. Canon / Nikon has every lens under the sun covering every need

So I would have to reluctantly agree with you. But I would break it down in term of price: category:

[$400 ~ $699] this is the category where Mirrorless begin to win over DSLR. Buyers in this category seek Continuous AF in VIDEO to film their vacation. Video is as important as Still photography, and they usually dislike Big Bulky DSLR. Most Asian buyer are in this group; and Panasonic Olympus Sony sold a load of their mirrorless in Asia, over 58% are buying mirrorless over DSLR.

[$200 ~ $400] without cheap dSLR, cheap Mirrorless dominate this category. The only truth competitor are the advance compact/point/shoot like Canon S100/G15

Not to mention the bloated ridiculous price on most of these small sensor cams. After charging 1000$+ for the m43 sensor camera, they dont have a built-in flash but have a OVF hump. How much more wannabe can it get! You get a better camera for 500$ and will also have access to a more mature and exhaustive family of lenses and accessories while getting better IQ, at the expense of a little weight and size which a lot of ppl serious about photography dont really bother about.

It seems like Olympus with their wannabe camera equipped with tiny m4/3 sensor, hump and no built in-flash sells like hotcakes for way more than $1000... Seems like al those buyers are completely brainless because (according to you) can get the same and even more for less than the half of the money. Way to go Olympus!

Yes it is selling like hotcakes, take for example OMD sold so much that even joke of the year pentax Q outsold it in year 2012 in japan.

The Pentax Q heavily discounted (still a nice camera for the Japanese market) against the E-M5 with full introduction price. I wonder which company made more profit...

The E-M5 was a hit in the market. For Olympus a really nice selling model, and it still is. A game changer. You can spit on it, but it won't matter, it's weather sealed.

People who are seriously about photography don't really bother about the equipment of others, and don't whine about choices of others on a forum.

The appropriate forum to post this comment would be m43 forum because that the only forum where you see a thread almost everyday comparing m43 to dslrs.